POLSKA AKADEMIA NAUK INSTYTUT ZOOLOGICZNY ANNALES ZOOLOGICI

Tom XXVIII Warszawa, 25 II 1971 Nr 12

Jerzy P r ó s z y ń s k i

Notes on systematics of Salticidae (Arachnida, Aranei). І - У І

[With 51 figures in the text]

I. Suggestion on more natural subdivision of theSalticidae family

It is apparent that the present subdivision of the family Salticidae into subfamilies is highly artificial and unsatisfactory. It was invented by S im o n (1897) and subsequently modified by P etrtjnkevitch (1928, 1939) as a practical method of segregation of taxa in want of any better system. The disadvantages of the system were well understand by both Sim o n and P etrtjnkevitch as well as by any arachnologist concerned with the family Salticidae. But invention of any better classification system depends on revision of about 4000 species grouped into 400 genera and 23 subfamilies and such a revision exceeds possibi­ lities of any single arachnologist. It is a tedious task of finding out resemblances and common features of groups of species and genera, finding out differences between such “natural” groups. While we cannot accomplish a satisfactory new system of Salticidae yet, we can start at least a search for relationships and resemblances among genera and to prepare gradually the basis for further revision of the family. There is a general consent among arachnologists that the cheliceral denti­ tion is a poor taxonomic criterion in Salticidae. It is an arbitrary superficial character and quite variable to that (P r ó s z y ń s k i , 1968a, b), so it should be better given up entirely or its usage should at least be restricted. Unfortunately we do not know yet a character which can replace cheliceral dentition in clas­ sification of all 400 genera. There is, however, a case of some 48 genera containing at present about 300 species which could be quite easily excluded from the “cheliceral dentition” system.

P 255. http://rcin.org.pl 228 J. Prószyński 2

The common feature of the 48 genera is their ant-like appearance and tra­ ditionally they have been called ant-like Salticidae or Salticidae formiciformes, as M. E. G a l ia n o used to call them. Following the cheliceral dentition criterion they are distributed at present among three major groups of subfamilies (P e - tkunkevitch , 1928, 1939; B o n n e t , 1959) and form 4 subfamilies or 10 groups of genera, and that in spite of some remarks of Sim o n (op. cit.) and P e t r t jn - k e v it c h (op. cit.) stressing striking resemblances between these subfamilies. As I met across several cases of unreliability of cheliceral dentition, I am ready to ask the question whether the structure of small teeth is more im­ portant than the whole set of characters drawn from the general structure of the whole body of a spider. Assuming a hypothesis that the cheliceral dentition is less important in that case, we may further assume that all ant-like Salticidae do form a natural group — a uniform subfamily, which according to no- menclatory rules should be called Synemosyninae B a n k s , 1892 — sensu novo. The type genus of the subfamily is Synemosyna H e n t z , 1846 and the type species of the genus — Synemosyna formica H e n t z , 1846. The words “ant-like” characterize the subfamily quite well. The main character is the visibility from above of the pedicel and the posterior margin of the céphalothorax, which in these spiders are not hidden beneath the anterior part of abdomen. This is due to the shape of the abdomen and may be linked with internal structure as well. There is also some kind of constriction on the céphalothorax and abdomen, more or less pronounced. Chelicerae in males are usually elongated but I am not certain if it is true in all cases, in any way that character is not an exclusive property of the subfamily. The structure of genital organs is not sufficiently known and do not allow any generalisation yet. To find out whether are there any features common for the whole subfamily in the proportions of the céphalothorax and the eye field, I have compared the below listed ratios calculated from the measurements scattered in the literature as well as from some measurements I made for the purpose. All together I have got these ratios for about one third of the total number of the ant-like Salti­ cidae species — a number certainly insufficient for drawing the final conclu­ sions, especially that number of specimens was rather very small, but allowing at least certain insight in the problem. The following ratios were calculated. 1. Eatio a — length of eye field in length of céphalothorax — the increas­ ing value of the ratio shows proportional lengthening of the eye field. 2. Eatio b — width of eye field [on level of eyes] I in width of eye field [on level of eyes] III. Value 1.00 of the ratio indicates that eye field forms a regular rectangle, other values indicate the trapezium-shaped eye field narrow­ ing either anteriorly (values smaller than 1.00) or posteriorly (values bigger than 1.00). 3. Eatio с — length of eye field in width of eye field [on level of eyes] I. Value 1.00 of the ratio indicates that eye field forms a regular square, other

Pciakiuj Akademii JNtuJfc I BIBLIOTEKA I mm m him ■ Л i і*п http://rcin.org.pl 3 Notea on systematica of Salticidae 229 values indicate that the eye field is elongated either longitudinally (values bigger than 1.00) or transversally (values smaller than 1.00) in relation to the main body axis. 4. Eatio h — height of the céphalothorax (measured up to the uppermost point of the eye III) in length of céphalothorax — increasing value of this ratio indicates increasing height of the céphalothorax. Apart from my own measurements I benefited from the data given in a set of excelent papers of M. E. G a l ia n o (1963, 1964a, b, c, 1965, 1966a, b, 1967, 1969)1 and I have also inferred some proportions from drawings in B o e w e r (1965). The latter are gross approximations, but may be accepted for general comparison on assumption that the drawings were drawn with a help of some kind of an optical device (camera lucida, Abbe’s apparatus) and reflect therefore the real proportions of the specimens drawn by B o e w e r . Such an assumption permits to increase considerably the number of compared species and specimens. The results of the comparison of 136 specimens of ant-like Salticidae classified into 102 species and 20 genera are shown on enclosed diagrams (fig.l). It appears that there is no common character in proportions of the céphalothorax permitting to separate ant-like Salticidae from the rest of the family. The variation range for each ratio in all compared specimens is almost equal to the approximate range of the same ratio within the whole family (I estimate that range on the basis of a series of preliminary measurements in various Salticidae — un­ published data). The comparison indicates, however, that there are certain possibilities of separating the genera or groups of genera with help of these proportions. I speak about the possibilities and not about the actual separation because of shortage of the data which does not permit drawing of any firm conclusions. The number of specimens of each species is grossly insufficient and the number of species does not represent the whole genera. Therefore the real variation ranges may be different from those shown. Some ranges appear excesively wide (for instance ratio b in Synemosyna, Martella and Myrmarachne) and this may be either due to some measurement errors or to lumping together two or more different ge­ nera. To show how the properly studied variation range looks like I enclose, in the column 18 of the fig. 1, an example of the variation range in a statistically re­ presentative sample of one sex single species set of 53 specimens of a not ant- -like Salticid — ?? of Sitticus rupicola (C. L. Kocn). The variation range in such a sample is in several instances wider than similar range in whole genera as shown on fig. 1. That means that the range for these genera is very insuffi­ ciently known. It is therefore apparent that the drawing of final conclusions

1 There ia a certain difference in M. E. G a l i a n o ’s and mine methods of taking the measu- rementa of the length of eye field and height of céphalothorax explained in G a l i a n o (1963) and Prószyński (1968c). The resulting differences in values of ratios calculated from these measurements are so small that do not influence the general conclusions drawn from the comparison.

http://rcin.org.pl 230 J. Prószyński 4

070л h igh 0,60- Ratio h 0,50-

0,40-

0,30- J ł - /OvV 0,20 - 7,50-1 narrowing ~ -" posteriorly--- - rln

7,40-

150-

1, 2 0 - Ratio b 1.10

parallelly 1, 00 - I -L 0,90-

0.80- _ narrowing an te rio rly

long

Ratio a 0,50-

0.30- - short 0.20 J

7.40-, narrow 1.30-

RatioD r UV Q 0' _

C 1.00- square 0,90- 0,80- 070- 0,60- 0,50- broad о .ч о -

http://rcin.org.pl 5 Notes on systematics of Salticidae 231

Fig. 1. Intra- and inter specific variation in the proportions of the céphalothorax and eye field in 136 specimens of the ant-like Salticidae, classified into 102 species and 20 genera: 1 — Synemosyna (25 specimens, 16 species — from Galiano): 2 — Semorina a n d Se- mora (3 specimens, 3 species — from Galiano); 3 — Fluda (2 specimens, 2 species — fro m G a li a n o ) ; 4 — Atomosphyrus (4 specimens, 2 species — from Galiano); 5 — B i- sonella (1 specimen — from Koewer); 6 — Sarinda (25 specimens, 16 species — from Galiano); 7 — Martella (7 specimens, 6 species — from Galiano); 8 — Myrmarachne (dotted lines — 6 specimens of Myrmarachne formicaria — own measurements, conti­ nuous lines — 41 male specimens, 41 species of African Myrmarachne — from Roewer); 9 — Zuniga (10 specimens, 2 species — from Galiano); 10 — Emertonius (1 s p e c im e n — fro m R o e w e r ) ; 11 — Sebastira (1 specimen — from Galiano); 12 — Osericta (1 s p e c i­ men — from Galiano); 13 — Synageles (5 specimens, 1 species - own measurements); 14 — Leptorcliestes (4 specimens, 2 species - own measureme ntsand from Galiano); 15 — Consignis a n d Chirothecia (4 specimens, 4 species — from Galiano); 16 — Agorius (1 s p e ­ cimen - own measurement); 17 — Peckhamia (2 specimens, 1 species - own measurements); 18 — a comparison of individual variation in a sample of 53 specimens of females of a single species of a not-ant-like Salticid spider — Sitticus rupicola (C. L. Koch). Explanation of signs: oval spots — value of the ratio in a single specimen or in an aberrant specimen, ver­ tical line — range of variation in studied specimens, crossbar — mean of variation, thick line — one standard deviation on each side of the mean, indicating the variation in a re­ presentative 68.26 % of the studied specimens, broken lines — variation range in the whole family of Salticidae (based on preliminary data).

http://rcin.org.pl 232 J. Prószyński 6 must be deferred until there shall be sufficient number of measurements for each species and genus. Measuring and calculating of these is a very tedious task, and it is not yet certain whether the result will not be disappointing. There is, however, the possibility that this metod of comparison may yeld finally a good result and it should be, therefore, further investigated. It is a pity that the data available in the literature do not contain measurements of all segments of legs, because some of these seems to be particularly promising. If I may suggest that, I would advocate taking the full set of measurements from each specimen studied as a standard procedure. Only when such measu­ rements shall be published, together with the satisfactory drawings of genitals of both sexes, the exact comparison will become possible. Lumping together the present 4 subfamilies: Synagelinae F . P . -Ca m b r id g e , 1900, Agoriinae S im o n , 1901, Peckhamiinae S im o n , 1901 and Myrmaraclminae S im o n , 1901 into the single subfamily Synemosyninae B a n k s , 1892 sensu novo is of course a hypothesis and will have to be proved by further research. It seems, however, that it will improve the system and, apart from that, will stimu­ late further improvements in the systematics of Salticidae. The Synemosyninae B a n k s , 1892 sensu novo will contain, therefore, the following genera: Agorius T h o r e l l , 1877, Apatita M e l l o -L e it ä o , 1933, Araclinotermes M e l l o -L e it ä o , 1928, Araegeus S im o n , 1901, Atomosphyrus S im o n , 1902, Augustaea S z o m b a t iiy , 1922, Belippo S im o n , 1910, Bellota P e c k h a m , 1892, BizonelJa S t r a n d , 1929, Boevs P e c k h a m , 1892, Chirothecia T a c z a n o w s k i, 1878, Cineas S im o n , 1901, Colaxes S im o n , 1901, Consignis S im o n , 1900, Damoetas P e c k h a m , 1885, Descanso P e c k h a m , 1892, Emertonius P e c k iia m , 1892, Enoplomischus G il t a y , 1931, Erica P e c k h a m , 1892, Eluda P e c k h a m , 1892, Ilaterius S im o n , 1900, Keyserlingella P e c k iia m , 1892, Kima P e c k h a m , 1902, Leptorchestes T h o r e l l , 1870, Ligonipes K a r sc ii, 1878, Ma­ rengo P e c k h a m , 1892, Martella P e c k iia m , 1892, Mexcala P e c k h a m , 1902, MyrmaracJine M ac L e a y , 1839, Osericta S im o n , 1901, Panachraesta S im o n , 1900, Paradeseanso V e l l a r d , 1924, Peekhamia S im o n , 1901, Philates S im o n , 1900, Pseudofluda M e l l o -L e it a o , 1928, Quelettia P e c k h a m , 1902, Sarinda P e c k h a m , 1885, Sarindoides M el l o - L e it a o , 1923, Sebastira S im o n , 1901, Semora P e c k iia m , 1892, Semorina S im o n , 1901, Simprulla S im o n , 1901, Simprulloides M e l l o -L e it ä o , 1933, Sobasina S im o n , 1897, Synageles S im o n , 1876, Synagelides S im o n , 1876, Synemosyna H e n t z , 1846, Taupoa P e c k h a m , 1907, Zuniga P e c k h a m , 1892. Among the above genera only three have more than 10 species (Myrma­ racJine — 139, Sarinda — 15, Synemosyna — 19), all remaining 45 genera have together 112 species, which makes an average of 2.4 species per genus (calculated from data given by B o n n e t , 1945-1961, ammended after G a l ia n o , 1963, 1964a, b, c, 1965, 1966a, b, 1967, 1969). These figures alone show that the state of knowledge of these spiders is unsatisfactory, in fact the majority of species and genera has been never revised. The exception is a number of

http://rcin.org.pl 7 Notes on systematic» of Salticidae 233 genera revised recently by G a l ia n o (op. cit.) and R o e w e r (1965), but the remaining genera are very poorly known. The problem, of further subdivision of the subfamily must be therefore deferred. Separation of the ant-like Salticidae into Synemosyninae subfamily leaves remaining 352 genera without any change. There is no possibility yet to find any satisfactory way of subdividing that part of the family into more or less natural units. I am positive that the present subdivision into a number of subfamilies obscures only the relationships, the classification of genera being arbitrary and often misleading. But the sheer number of genera and species make that task really a formidable one. To retain the principle of the dichotomous division, I propose for a time being to call all not-ant-like Salticidae the “Salticinae” subfamily or better group of subfamilies. The taxonomic procedure with these spiders will retain check of the cheliceral dentition as a first step and then analyse of other cha- ractes given in existing keys as long as some new ideas will appear. I am positive that revision of that part of the family is a very urgent task.

II. On Aelurillus species in Poland There were some confusions with Central European Aelurillus species due to a considerable intraspecific variation of Ae. v-insignitus (Cl e r c k , 1758) and certain mistakes in the S im o n ’s (1937) key. There are two apparently good species in Central Europe: Ae. festivus (C. L. K o ch , 1834) and Ae. v- -insignitus (Cl e r c k , 1758). The examination of syntypes of Ae. gilvus (S im o n , 1868) shows that they are conspecific with Ae. festivus while Ciiy z e r and K u l ­ c z y ń s k i (1891) remarks on Ae. gilvus concern presumably aberrant specimens of Ae. v-insignitus. As epigynum of Ae. festivus S im o n has published drawing of epigynum of either atypical female of Ae. v-insignitus or even of other related species (S im o n , 1937, fig. 1978) and this caused misidentification of some spe­ cimens (P r ó s z y ń s k i, 1961). These misunderstandings are straightened out, I hope, below.

Aelurillus festivus (С. L. Косы, 1831)

S y n o n y m : Aelurillus gilvus S i m o n , 1868. Material: a) “Aelurillus gilvus E. S. Polonia b. 2 3 8 2 , 799” — ju v . ?, <$ — apparently syntypes — coll. S im o n MNHN-Paris; b) 25 samples of Ae. festivus in the collection of IZ PAN-Warszawa. R em ark. The syntypes came from “Kiew, Russie” according to original description, b u t it seems that they are the same as the above mentioned Simon’s specimens from “Po­ lonia”. It was in line with Simon’s habits to write more general labels (for instance “Galia”) when exact locality was mentioned in the description. The substituting of “Polonia” for “Kiew, Russie” was quite an understandable mistake to be made by a Frenchman Simon — he has received specimens from Taczanowski, who had got them from Karpiński — both Polish naturalists, who could possibly consider “K iew” (Kiev) as a part of the former Polish Kingdom to which Kiev belonged in the X IV -X V II century and which had certain percen-

http://rcin.org.pl 234 J. Prószyński 8

tage of Polish population in the Sim on’s time. In the time when the ^ of Poland was labelled on official political maps as “Russian Empire” the name usually boycoted by Poles, su-ch a mistake was quite easy. At any rate there are no other specimens of Ae. gilvus in tb e Sim on’s collection and there is no indication of any other specimens in Sim on’s further pu­ blications (1901-1903, 1937). I assume, therefore, that Simon saw only two specimens of Ae. gilvus, that label “Polonia” is substituted for “Kiew, Russie” and that the two above mentioned specimens are in fact the syntypes.

0.18

0,18

Figs. 2-5. Aelurillus festivus (C. L. K och , 1834). Male copulatory organ of the syntype spe­ cimen of Ae. gilvus (Sim.): 2 — ventral view; 3-5 — three different views on tibial apo­ physis.

More important characters of a male

As the genital organs are quite characteristic there is no need to indulge into full description of the external appearance. The males differ from other species of the genus in lacking the ventral black protuberance at the apical end of the pedipalpal femur. The ventral view of the copulatory organ (fig. 2) does not differ much from other species, but the tibial apophysis (fig. 3), bi- ramous with broad sclerotized ventral protuberance and crescent-shaped pale dorsal branch, is quite special. Figs. 4 and 5 show various appearance of that apophysis depending from its position in relation to the optical axis of a ste-

http://rcin.org.pl d Notes on systematica of Salticidae 235 reomicroscope during examination. A comparison of these figures with figures 8 and 9 in my paper on East Siberian Salticidae (P r ó s z y ń s k i , in print) reveals that there is a good deal of individual variation in these structures, a geographic variation perhaps, but general outlines are characteristic. The figures 2-5 are drawn from the presumed syntype specimen of Ae. gilvus and prove its identity with copulatory organ of what is generally accepted as male of an Ae. festivus.

More important characters of a female The structure of epigynum allows an easy and quick identification of females of this species. The external appearance of epigynum is given on fig. 6 and its internal structure on fig. 7. It should be rememberd that the figure 1978 of an epigynum given by Sim o n (1937), is wrong and represent epigynum of either

0,18

6

Figs. 6-7. Aelurillus festivus (C. L. K o ch , 1834). Epigynum before and after mecaration.

http://rcin.org.pl 236 J. Prószyński 1 0 atypical Aelurillus v-insignitus (Cl .) or Aelurillus affinis (L u c a s , 1839) perhaps. I have observed that both males and females of what I consider Aelurillus festivus do occure together in the same environment: grass overgrown limestone slopes near Tyniec and behave in a somewhat different manner than Aelurillus v-insignitus, so I feel justified in assumption that both sexes are conspecific. This agrees also with Ch y z e r and K u l c z y ń s k i (1891) and M. D a h l (1926).

Aelurillus v-insignitus ( C le r c k , 1758)

S y n o n y m : Aelurillus gilvus : Chyzer and Kulczyński, 1891, пес Simon, 1868. M aterial: “Aelur. insignitus Banyuls, coll. L. B e rla n d ” — 1 <$, 1 $ coll. MNHN-Pa- ris; “Aelurillus festivus ” 1 Ç from Southern Norway — coll. J. A. L. Cooke — Oxford; Aelurillus gilvus det. ex coll. W. K ulczyński: 2 ÇÇ from Poland, 1 $ from “Kolozsvai” [Cluj, Rumania], 2

Jo, 229

Figs. 8-11. Aelurillus v-insignitus (Cl e r c k , 1758). Colour pattern variation in males: 8 — Ślęża Mt. “black” specimen, 9 — Puszcza Kampinoska “grey” specimen, 10 — Col Bayard, France specimen, 11 — Portofino Yetta, Italy specimen.

These are some troubles with this species due to its wide individual variation. There are at least two types of coloration and of structure of genital organs in these spiders in Poland. One form has black eye field and abdomen in male, its white “V” sign on the céphalothorax and white stripe on the abdomen

http://rcin.org.pl 11 Notes on system atics of Salticidae 237 are strikingly distinct (fig. 8). It is known from the Ślęża Mt. massiv, some 35 km. SSW from Wroclaw, where it dwells on rocks and stones in snnny places. The other form is much paler, usually greyish with very indistinct white greyish

0,18

16

0.15

Figs. 12-21. Aelurillus v-insignitus (C le r c k , 1758). Variation in male copulatory organ: 12-14, 18, 19 — “black” specimen; 15-17, 20, 21 — grey specimen, 12, 15 — ventral vbw; 13, 16 — lateral view; 18, 21 — tibial apophysis, 19-20 diagram showing differences in tibial apophysis shape and proportions in “black” and “grey” specimens; 14, 17 — fe­ moral protuberance.

http://rcin.org.pl 238 J. Prószyński 1 2

“Y” sign. I have found numerous specimens of that form on dry and warm sand dunes covered with lichens in the Puszcza Kampinoska, forest near Warsaw, and in several other places on sandy grounds. Both forms look so different that I took them, at first, for two different species. Further research, however, revealed that there is a very wide range of colour-variation in males of this species, and it appears quite possible that “black” and “grey” forms are just extremes of the variation. Other examples of the colour variation are shown on figs 10-11. The specimen from French Alps (Col Bayard near Gap, slightly more than 1200 m. above the sea) has entirely black céphalothorax with greyish indistinct “V”, its abdomen is dark grey and the stripe greyish-white. The whitish coloration of the lateral surfaces of the abdomen expands slightly onto the dorsal surface and is visible as a white “rim”. The very unusual coloration found in two males from Portofino Vetta near Genoa, Italy, is shown on fig. 11. The central area of the eye field and thorax is whitish and fuses with the anterior “V” sign. The margins of the céphalothorax are white and broad. The white “rim” of the abdomen expanded so far onto the dorsal surface, that the black area is reduced to two narrow parallel stripes, separated by a broad white stripe. The copulatory organs of males from Portofino Yetta are similar to those of other males of the species, unfortunately I haven’t collected any fe­ male specimen to confirm identification of the species. The specimens were collected on sunny clearing and ruins of a building on the summit of Portofino Vetta promontory, about 1 hour walk from a Portofino Yetta Hotel and a radio transmitter aerial. It must be said, however, that the specimens from other Ligurian localities (Camping Cogoleto near Genoa, Col Turchino, Col between Leuna and Lago Lavagno) did not show such a peculiar coloration. Coloration of females is less characteristic. The comparison of male genital organs of a “black” and “grey” form is shown on figs. 12-21. The “grey” specimen is distinctly smaller and so all its organs are smaller too. There are some minor differences in shape and pro­ portions in all parts, the most discernible in shape and proportions of tibial apophysis (figs. 19-20 as well as 18 and 21). However, examination of larger series of specimens does not confirm taxonomic value of these differences. There is a good deal of variation and numerous intermediate forms. I can­ not exclude that there migth be some taxonomically acceptable differences between of both forms, but I could not find them myself. Much more striking differences are visible in the structure of epigynum in females of both forms. Figs. 22-23 show epigynum in two K u l c z y n s k i ’s spe­ cimens, corresponding with “black” (fig. 22) and “grey” (fig. 23) forms. Exa­ mination of a number of specimens from various geographic areas shows again a considerable variation and numerous intermediate forms. The internal structure of epigynum does not give much help in this case. The spermathe- cae are heavily sclerotized vesicles consisting of two fused longitudinal chambers. The copulatory opening is located in the anterior part of epigynum, usually

http://rcin.org.pl 1 3 Notes on systematics of Salticidae 239 underneath the sclerotized “roof” and pass directly into first longitudinal chamber of spermatheca, without any intermediary canal. The first longitudinal chamber opens into a second, more dorsally located chamber at the end of spermathecal vesicle. The second chamber leads to a spherical terminal vesicle

2 3

0,09

Figs. 22-23. Aelurillus v-insignitus (C le r c k , 1758). Variation in female copulatory organ. Epigynum: 22 — “black” specimen; 23 — “grey” specimen. lying on the level of the copulatory opening but dorsally to it, that is under­ neath the opening and roof when studying the preparation ventral surface uppermost nuder a microscope. There is an opening of an accessory gland in

http://rcin.org.pl 240 J. Prószyński 14 the terminal vesicle and a conical sclerotized fertilisation canal (broken and lacking in some preparations). The differences between prepared epigyna I studied is in location of a copulatory opening, which may be under the “roof” or outside it, position of the first chamber in relation to the second one, position of the whole spermatheca in relation to the roof and so on. The first impression is that these differences are quite cosiderable, closer examination reveals, however, that the basic plan of the structure is identical in every case. The spermathecae are spherical bodies and during preparation of epigynum can always twist and move in relation to the external sculpture of the epigynum. That is presumably the explanation of some of the differences observed. It appears that spermathecae shown on fig. 25 are fixed in a somewhat diagonal position and those on fig. 26 are lying flat but pushed somewhat forward.

Figs. 24-26. Aelurillus v-imignitus (C lerck , 1758). Variation in female copulatory organ. Epigynum after maceration: 24 — “black” specimen; 25 — “grey” specimen; 26 — spe­ cimen from Banyuls, France.

http://rcin.org.pl 15 Notes on system atics of Salticidae 241

Differences in more median or periferic location of first chambers (figs. 24, 26) do not seem to be significant. All these explanations are hypotheses and should be checked on larger series of specimens.

I I I . Redescription of Heliophanus varians Sim on , 1868

Material: a) “JEel. varians E. S. Polonia b. 2321, 867” — 1 c? — lectotype new, 1 $ — paralectotype new, coll. E. Simon, MNHN-Paris; b) “Heliophanus varians Simon, Orsova 1873, VI coll. H erm an . Lt. sz. 882” “Simon vidit” — 1

Description of male Céphalothorax brown, eye field brown with surrounding of lateral eyes black brown. Thorax with two paler areas behind the eye field, separated by a median darker streak. Clypeus very narrow. Length of céphalothorax 1.98, length of eye field 0.84, width of eye field I 1.08, width of eye field III 1.21 Eatios: a — 0.42, b — 0.89, с — 0.78. Abdomen dorsally greyish-brown with a white line consisting of white setae on the anterior dorsal edge of the abdomen. Abdomen ventrally — fawnish- -grey. Length of abdomen 2.13. Sternum pale brown. Coxae fawn. Maxillae fawn with two angular pro­ tuberances at the outer distal angle. Labium brown. Chelicerae fawnish-brown with a large single tooth on the inner posterior and 2 teeth on inner anterior margin. Pedipalps brown with lateral edges of the cymbium darker. The shape of the copulatory organ is shown on figs. 27-29. There are two tibial apophyses, the posterior one very thin and small — much smaller than in the related species H. flavipes (H a h n ), resembles to certain extent H. corsicus Sim . (K r a u s 1955 and figs. 28-30). Femoral apophysis (figs. 30-31) directed posteriorwards, forked at the end. It is worth of notice that the specimen of H. varians from the H e r m a n collection, Zool. Mus. Budapest, has right palpus deformed — much smaller with undeveloped tibial apophyses and femoral apophyse unforked. Legs. Femora I-IV brown with distal dorsal tip yellowish with a few white setae. There is a stripe of white setae on inner anterior edge of femora III-IV, and a similar but shorter one on femur II. Patella I brown, its inner lateral edge paler and covered with whitish setae. Tibia I brown with a stripe of white setae on inner anterior edge. Remaining segments brown with tibiae, metatarsi and tarsi II-IY somewhat paler. Length of segments of legs: I 0.48+0.63

http://rcin.org.pl 242 J. Prószyński 16

Figs. 27-32. Heliophanus varians Simon, 1868, male and female copulatory organs. 27-29 — male copulatory organ, ventral, dorsal and lateral views; 30-31 — male pedipalp femoral apophysis, lateral inner and outer surface views. 32 — epigynum.

+ 0.78+0.66+1.17, II 0.42+0.51+0.55+0.48+0.90, III 0.45 + 0.51+0.58 + 0.51 + 0.93, IV 0.49+0.90+0.81+0.55+1.12. Ratio d - 1.40.

Remark: the coloration of the specimen is presumably faded and the natural colora­ tion was presumably darker.

Description of female Céphalothorax dark brown with central area of the eye field pale brown, surrounding of eyes lateral almost black. Clypeus very narrow. Length of céphalothorax 2.40, length of eye field 0.85, width of eye field I 1.23, width of eye field III 1.35. Batios: a — 0.35, b — 0.91, с — 0.69.

http://rcin.org.pl 17 Notes on systematics of Salticidae 243

Abdomen dorsally pale brownish-grey, covered with colourless shining scales. Dorsal surface bordered along the edge with a belt of white scales. Abdomen ventrally slightly paler. Length of abdomen 4.25. Epigynum — oval with median constriction formed by posterior edge folded anteriorwards in the middle (fig. 32) and giving the epigynum the final shape resembling the sign oo. There are two lateral depressions on the epigynum separated by the indistinct median ridge. The copulatory openings are located in the anterior outer parts of the epigynal depressions, the copulatory canals form a long narrow bow stretching far to the front from the epigynum. In II. flavipes ( H a h n ) epigynum forms an oval depressed plate without constriction and only with a very indistinct fold at the rear margin, the copulatory canals do not exceed anterior margin of epigynum. In H. auratus C. L. K o c ii epigynum has two depressions separated by a very distinct ridge. Sternum brown. Coxae pale fawn. Maxillae brown, white tipped, without angular protuberances. Labium brown, white tipped. Chelicerae brown with a large single tooth on inner posterior and two teeth on inner anterior margin. Pedipalps — femur brown with a pale yellow streak distally on dorsal surface, remaining segments pale yellow. Legs. Femur I dark brown with a paler, white setae covered spot distally on dorsal surface. Femora II-IV dark brown with two longitudinal yellow streaks separated by a median brown one on the dorsal surfaces, ventrally and laterally brown. Remaining segments yellow with brown antero-lateral surfaces of patellae, tibiae and, less distinctly, metatarsi I-IV. Length of segments: I 0.49+0.60+0.70+0.66+1.03, Ц 0.45+0.57+0.57+0.48+0.97, III 0.54 + 0.78+0.69+0.58+1.05, IV 0.55+1.08+0.93+0.66+1.35.

Remark. The natural coloration is presumably darker.

IV. On Pellenes nigrociliatus (L. K ocii, 1875) and Pellenes nigrociliatus var. b ilu ­ nulatus Sim on, 1877

In his posthumous sixth volume of the “Les Arachnides de France” S i m o n has included his previously described species Pellenes bilunulatus S i m o n , 1877 into Pellenus nigrociliatus (L. K o c h , 1875) as a varietas. P. bilunulatus was described on a basis of a single specimen from Penne, Dept. Tarn in Southern France, differing from the typical P. nigrociliatus in presence of a white lon­ gitudinal line on the eye field, and the connection between left and rigth first white diagonal line on the abdomen, forming a complete bow. S i m o n perhaps was not entirely sure that the holotype specimen belongs to a separate species because he added a remark stating that this sort of coloration is typical for young specimens in related Pellenes species. Had S i m o n really been uncertain he would be rigth because closer examination of a number of specimens reveals that in Pellenes nigrociliatus it is a juvenile coloration too.

http://rcin.org.pl 244 J. Prószyński 18

I owe my specimens to Prof. Dr. I. M i k u l s k a , Nicolaus Copernicus Uni­ versity, Toruń, who has carried interesting biological observations on numerous specimens of a spider found on the outskirts of Toruń and subsequently iden­ tified by M . Jacques D e n i s as the Pellenes nigrociliatus var. bilunulata. Studying three of these specimens I have found a grey “juvenile” coloration of abdomen resembling that in P. nigrociliatus var. bilunulatus in two specimens (fig. 40), the third specimen was a typical P. nigrociliatus with black abdomen and short and broadly separated white diagonal lines (fig. 42). I compared these specimens with the holotype specimen of P. bilunulatus and a Silesian specimen presu­

mably syntype of P. nigrociliatus from the S i m o n ’ s collection, MNHN, Paris,

send to me very kindly by Dr. M . H u b e r t and Mme F. B e b i è r e , MNIDST, Paris. The results of comparison leave no doubts that despite of the differences in coloration and minor differences in genital organs, all these specimens are

conspecific and that name P. nigrociliatus var. bilunulatus S i m o n , 1877 should

be considered a jimior synonym of P. nigrociliatus (L. K o c h , 1875). The revised description of female P. nigrociliatus is as follows.

Pellenes nigrociliatus (L. K o c h , 1875)

Synonyms and combinations: Attus nigrociliatus [E. Sim. (in litt.) — sic!] L. K o c h , 187 5 1, Pellenes nigrociliatus: S im on, 1876, B o n n e t , 1958, Pellenes nigrociliatus var. bilunulata : S im on , 1937, D e n is and M ik u l s k a , 1960, M i k u l s k a , 1961a, 1961b, Pellenes nigrociliatus var. bilunulatus-. Bonnet, 1958, Pellenes nigrociliatus bilunulatus : D e n i s and M i k u l s k a , 1960. Material: a) “Pellenes bilunulatus, Gallia [Penne, Dept. Tarn.] b. 2379, 2228” — 1 $ — holotype — coll. E. Simon, MNHN-Paris. b) “Pellenes nigrociliatus L. K. Silesia b. 2379, 3101” — 1$ — most probably a syntype, coll. E. Simon, MNHN-Paris. c) “Pelle­ nes nigrociliatus L. K.

Description of females Céphalothorax dark brown with two large pale yellow spots covered with white scales behind eyes III. Eye field black brown with white longitudinal median line (figs. 37-38) consisting of white scales. The length of the line differs considerably and may be absent entirely — as in syntype specimen. Clypeus

1 The authorship of this species is a bit confused — L. K och wrote S im o n ’s name, S im o n originally that of L. K och and latter his own. There is no doubt that the first published description is that of L. K och (1875) — and that it was written by L. K och alone. It was only L. K o c h ’s assumption that S im o n had earlier written and sent under press a description of this species, and that assumption appeared false because S im o n ’s description appeared in 1876, a year later. Therefore it is L. K och who must be considered the author and not Sim o n .

http://rcin.org.pl 19 Notes on systematics of Salticidae 245

Figs. 33-42. Pellenes nigrociliatus (L. K o ch , 1875). Variation in females: 33, 35, 38, 40 — syn- type specimen from Silesia; 34, 36, 37, 39 — liolotype specimen of P. bilunulatus Sim .; 41-42 — Toruń specimens 33-36 — epigynum before and after maceration; 37-38 — cépha­ lothorax colour pattern; 39-42 — abdominal colour pattern. narrow, covered with white scales. Length of céphalothorax1: 2.10+2.17 + 1.95+2.31+2.24+2.46, length of eye field 0.87+0.90+0.93+0.97+0.85 + 1.03,

1 It is worth of attention that specimens from Toruń are the smallest of all and the dimensions increase in specimens from more southern localities. To show this I quote the measurements in the following order: three specimens from Toruń-fsyntype from “Sile­ sia”-j-holotype of P. bilunulatus from Tarn. Dept + Bulgarian specimen.

http://rcin.org.pl 246 J. Prószyński 2 0 width of eye field I 1.27+1.30+1.29+1.38+1-27+1.42, width of eye field III 1.42+1.53+1.48+1.57+1.44+1.66. Ratios: a — 0.41+0.41+0.48+0.42 + +0.38+0.42, Ъ - 0.89+0.85+0.87+0.88+0.88+0.86, с - 0.68+0.69+0.72 + 0.70+0.67+0.72. Abdomen black brown, sometimes greyish (juvenile coloration) with thick white lines on the anterior edge, median longitudinal and two pairs of short diagonal lines (figs. 40, 42). In forms with retained juvenile coloration the first pair of diagonal white lines may be extended as to contact with the anterior tip of median white line (figs. 39, 41), the connection is, however, very thin. Abdomen ventrally pale greyish-brown with median longitudinal stripe whitish. Length of abdomen — 2.85+2.70+2.47+2.77+3.52+3.37. Epigynum has two round depressions in the anterior half separated by a central sclerotized fold ended anteriorly with vaginal roof (figs. 33-34). The spermatheca is a compact sclerotized body without separate canals. The co- pulatory opening cavity is funnel-shaped and leads through a twisted passage into small round chamber at the rear end of spermatheca, there are two trans­ verse oval chambers and a terminal cone (figs. 35-36) anteriorly from that. The vagina is located anteriorly to the spermathecae — a position charac­ teristic for the genus. Sternum dark brown. Coxae I-II dark brown, III-IV fawnish-brown. Maxillae and labium dark brown, white tipped. Chelicerae dark brown with single large black tooth on inner posterior edge and two teeth on inner anterior edge. Pedipalps pale yellow. Legs brown, paler or darker in various specimens, anterior leg darker and more robust. Dorsal surfaces paler. Length of segments: I (0.52+0.48+0.46 + + 0.55+ 0.54+0.60)+ (0.52+0.55+0.49+0.60+0.54+0.67) + (0.73+0.75+0.67 +0.78 +0.75 +0.90) + (0.73 +0.82 +0.75+0.82 +0.75+0.90) + (l. 11 +1.14 +1.09 +1.17+1.12+1.42), II - (0.45+0.42 +0.46 +0.48+0.49+0.54) +(0.45 +0.46 +0.42+0.46+0.46+0.54)+ (0.52+0.55+0.51+0.57+0.54+0.67)+ (0.57+0.66 + 0.57+0.63+0.67+0.75)+(0.87+0.96+0.90+0.96+0.97+1.12), III - (0.54 +0.61+ 0.54+0.54+0.61+0.67) + (0.75+0.78+0.75+0.75+0.75+0.87) + (0.82 +0.75+ 0.78+0.87+0.82+0.97)+ (0.82+0.81+0.79+0.82+0.82 +0.97)+(1.57 +1.57+1.57+1.59+1.65+1.85), IV - (0.57+0.57+0.57+0.57+0.60+0.66) + (0.73+0.78+0.67+0.72+0.69+0.84)+ (0.63+0.67+0.60+0.69+0.67 +0.72) + (0.60+0.60+0.54+0.55+0.60+0.67)+ (1.05+1.27+1.14+1.15+1.09+1.47) Ratio d — 0.76+0.90+0.77+0.79+0.82+0.74. It must be underlined that the leg III is distinctly longer than leg IV, the biggest differences being in tibia, patella and femur. Remarks on male I have seen a single male of this species a long time ago during my visit in Museum d’Histoire Naturelle, Genève1 in 1965.

1 I shall always rem em b er the very kind hospitality of the late D r. H. G isin , Curator of Invertebrates in that Museum, who has made it possible for me to make study on d e L e s s e r t ’s collection.

http://rcin.org.pl 21 Notes on systematics of Salticidae 247

I made only incomplete study at tliat time but because it appeared impos­ sible to obtain any male specimen from Poland I decided to quote these in this paper to give at least some indication on its features. The abdomen of male is dark brown with a single median white line expanded into a round spot anteriorly and stretching from the anterior one third of the abdomen up to spinnerets. Chelicerae with single tooth on inner posterior and two teeth on inner anterior margin.

Figs. 43-44. Pellenes nigrociliatus (L. K ocii, 1875). Male copulatory organ: ventral and lateral views.

Tibial apophysis on pedipalps thin and straight, the conductor and stylus arise laterally from bulbus as a single process and separate in a mid-length, the conductor being slightly shorter than stylus (figs. 43-44). The presence of more or less developed conductor is characteristic for the genus. Length of céphalothorax 1.62, length of eye field 0.70, width of eye field I — 1.02, width of eye field III — 1.12. Ratios: a — 0.43, b — 0.91, с — 0.68.

http://rcin.org.pl ш J. Prószyński 22

Length of segments of legs: I 0.42+0.50+0.65+0.62+0.95, II 0.37 + +0.35+0.37+0.50+0.70, III 0.45+0.55+0.55+0.62+1.20, IV 0.47+0.47 + +0.45 + 0.37+0.87. Ratio d - 0.82. The male is smaller than female, the proportions are, however, quite compa­ rable. Leg III is again longer than leg IV and tibia III longer than tibia IV. The behaviour of this species calls for some attention. Females of Pellenes nigrociliatus have a very curious habit of hoisting above the ground the twisted hollow objects like empty snail shells or twisted dry leaves, suspending them on grass straws as a hiding and cocoon protecting place. It was first observed by Zimmermann and reported by L. Koch (1875:17), who wrote about this species: “Die Eiersäckchen meist in verdorrten Blättern, welche an Grashalmen oder anderen am Boden befindlichen Sachen aufgesteckt waren” and confirmed later by a series of detailed observations by M ikulska (1961a, b, also Denis and Mikulska, 1960). It was I. Mikulska who observed the actual process of hoisting up the snail shell, hiding of spider in the shells attacking of prey. Females can be observed from early May till August, th, eggs, usually 10 in the cocoon, are laid in May and the young hatch 2 weeke after. A single male was observed early in April, before appearance of females. L. Koch observed male specimens in May, females and cocoons at end of June and in July. Only females were observed to hoist shells above the ground. The shells of a Helicella snails are hoisted by gradual pulling of numerous thre­ ads, one by one, attached to the shell from an elevated object. The pulling of a single thread by a spider is barely visible and the whole process very slow — the shell moves 3 centimeters upwards within 20 minuts time, it is finally suspended 20 centimeters above the ground and 3 centimeters below the suspension point. The shell aperture is then covered by a web courtain, the spider leaves retreat only when shell is in full sunlight. According to L. K och, Zimmermann has found his specimens on sun-exposed sandy places near Rothenburg and Niesky in the Lausitz region, in eastern part of Germany, and these places are terra typica. The word “Silesia” on the Simon’s label refer to the administrative incorporation of the Lausitz region into Silesian province at that time. The specimens of Mikulska came from a sunny, grass covered slope at the outskirts of Toruń, Northern Poland, so the environment of the species is in both cases comparable. The collecting localities in Hungary are more numerous and distributed in various part of the country (Chyzer and Kulczyński, 1891), it is also known from Czechoslovakia, Austria, Rumania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Egean and Thyrrenian Sea Islands, Southern France (Departments Tarn and Basses-Alpes) and from English (La Manche) Channel Islands. The presence of the species in south-western part of the USSR needs confirmation and the report on its occurence in Japan is rather uncon­ vincing. All these data give a very incomplete picture of real distribution of the species. It may be labelled perhaps a “South European species” until new evidences will fill the gaps.

http://rcin.org.pl 23 Notes on systematica of Salticidae 249

V. On Philaeus bilineatus (W a l c k e n a e r , 1826) and Philaeus chrysops (Poda , 1761)

It appears that the problem of existence of Philaeus bilineatus, a species reported by a number of authors, arose from individual variation due to irregu­ larities in secondary sexual dimorphism in well known and widespread species Philaeus chrysops. Philaeus chrysops, a Mediterranean species occurring also on isolated spots in Central Europe, including sparsely distributed places on the whole territory of Poland, is striking by the intensely red abdomen with a black median streak. The female’s abdomen is grey with some usually indistinct white spots scattered on both sides of a median darker areas. The abdomen of young specimens of both sexes is grey. The arrangement of white spots on female’s abdomen vary quite conside­ rably. White spots in specimens from Fontaine de Vaucluse, France, do form two indistinct and barely visible white streaks devoid of any sharp borders with dark grey background. They can be quite easily overlooked during a casual examination and it seems that this condition is prevalent in South European specimens. The females collected in Poland, however, have these streaks turned into two regular, very sharp and distinct white lines, stretching parallelly along the whole abdomen. That abdominal pattern happens also sometimes in more southern populations for instance in Simon’s specimen from France, identified as Ph. bilineatus. That female coloration happens sometimes in young male specimens, in a stage when pedipalpal tarsus is swollen but the copulatory organ is still covered by the cuticle of tarsus and presumably not yet entirely formed. I have seen such a specimen from Rozwadów near Tarnobrzeg (Pró­ szyński, 1961), and in described by Simon (1868) specimen from Warsaw, kept in the Taczanowski’s collection (IZ PAN-Warszawa). The analysis of the literature shows that there is no single remark on an adult male of Ph. bilineatus , early S im o n ’s remark (1868) being disproved in his latter publication (1876) and by examination of his specimen. The female specimens of Ph. bilineatus described by S im on (1876) and C h y z e r and K u l ­ c z y ń s k i (1891) are identical with Ph. chrysops females from Poland. The copulatory organs of females of typical Ph. chrysops and Ph. bilineatus (figs. 45-48) are identical in their general outline and do not show any signifi­ cant differences. Therefore it should be concluded that both forms are conspecific, that in some populations white spots on female’s abdomens are changed into two regular parallel white lines and that some immature males have retained their juvenile, or may be female coloration. The name Philaeus bilineatus (W alckenaer, 1826) should be therefore considered a junior synonym of the name Philaeus chrysops ( P o d a , 1761). It would be very interesting to find out whether the “bilineatus ” males retain their unusual coloration after reaching full maturity.

http://rcin.org.pl 250 J. Prószyński 24

47

Figs. 45-48. Philaeus chrysops (P o d a , 1761), epigynum before (ventral view) and after m a­ ceration (dorsal view); 45, 47 — Ph. bilineatus specimen from S im o n collection; 46, 48 — a typical specimen from Fontaine de Vaucluse.

The above conclusions have been drawn from the study of the following material: a) “Philaeus bilineatus W. Gallia, b. 2400, 746” — 1 ?, coll. E. Simon, MNHN-Paria; b) uT>en- dryphantes bilineatus (W alck.) Warszawa, leg. W. Taczanowski, det. Simon, 74” — 1 ju v . ?, coll. W. Taczanowski, IZ PAN-Warszawa; c) uPhilaeus bilineatus (Walck.) det. [sub 732] W. K ulczyński; Węgry [Hungary], Simontornya, 1887, leg. L e n d l ” — 3 ÇÇ, 8 ju v . — coll. W. Kulczyński, IZ PAN-Warszawa; d) identified by J. Prószyński specimens of Ph. chrysops from: Rozwadów distr. Tarnobrzeg, on a sand dune, 19. IX. 1957, leg. B. Bu­ r a k o w s k i — 1 ju v. 3, 2 juv. Ç; numerous specimens from Puszcza Kampinoska near War­ szawa — leg. J. Prószyński; Fontaine de Vaucluse, Dept. Vaucluse, France, on limestone

http://rcin.org.pl 25 Notes on systematics of Salticidae 251

rocks 14-15. V. 1966, leg. M. P r ó sz y ń sk a and J. P r ó sz y ń sk i — 3 1 juv. cT — all speci­ mens kept in the coll. IZ PAN-Warszawa.

VI. On Phlegra luteofasciata (S im on , 1871)

It is a relatively simple case of a mistake arisen from overestimation of individual variation. After study of a pale specimen of a Phlegra with distinct paler stripes on the céphalothorax Sim o n decided that it differs from his very dark specimens of Attus fasciatus and described as a new species Attus luteo- -fasciatus (1871). Later (1937) he has changed its systematic position and included as a subspecies into Phlegra fasciata (H a h n , 1826). Closer examination of the holotype of Phlegra luteofasciata shows that its copulatory organs do not differ from S im o n ’s drawings of Phlegra fasciata (Sim o n , 1937:1220) and the slight difference in coloration is not significant in view of general variation of that character. An additional argument is that Phlegra luteofasciata is known from a single specimen, the holotype, from Poland and has been never collected again. To straighten that question out I have studied the holotype and decided that it is conspecific with Phlegra fasciata (Hahn, 1826) and that the name Phlegra luteofasciata (Sim on, 1871) should be considered a junior synonym. The redescription is given below.

Phlegra fasciata (Hahn, 1826)

Synonyms and combinations: Attus fasciatus: S im o n , 1868, Attus subfasciatus S im o n , 1868, Attus luteo-fasciatus S im o n , 1871, Phlegra fasciata: S im o n , 1876 et auct., Phlegra luteofasciata: S im o n , 1876, Phlegra subfasciata: S i m o n , 1876, Phlegra fasciata luteofasciata: S im o n , 1937, Phlegra fasciata subfasciata: B o n n e t , 1958. Material: “Phlegra luteofasciata E. S. Polonia, b. 2381, 895” — 1 £ — holotype, coll. E. S im o n , MNHN-Paris. Rem ark: The whole genus Phlegra S im o n , 1876 deserves detailed revision. The diffe­ rences between species are not clear, the details of copulatory organs, especially in females unknown, the individual variation has never been studied. There is also a question whether the genus Phlegra or some of its species do really differ from the genus Aelurillus Sim o n , 1884.

Description of male (holotype of Ph. luteofasciata) Céphalothorax light brown with eye field dark brown and thorax dorsally brown with two yellow stripes along the lateral edges of the dorsal surface. Clypeus broad, whitish yellow. Length of céphalothorax 2.77, length of eye field 0.90, width of eye field 1 1.32, width of eye field III 1.35. Ratios: a — 0.32, b - 0.97, с - 0.68.

http://rcin.org.pl 252 J. Prószyński 26

Abdomen dorsally dark brown, ventrally pale greyish-fawn, its length — - 2.47. Sternum and coxae pale yellow. Maxillae and labium pale yellow, white tipped. Chelicerae pale yellow with a small single tooth on inner posterior, and two teeth on inner anterior margin.

0,18

Figs. 49-51. Phlegra fasciata (H a h n , 1826). Male copulatory organ of the holotype specimen of Ph. luteofasciata (Sim .), ventral and lateral views and dorsal view of tibia.

Pedipalps pale yellow. The copulatory organ resemble in its general outlines the same organ in the genus Aelurillus Sim . The bulbus is long and broad, the vi­ sible part of the stylus is broad with a series of minute teeth on outer lateral edge (fig. 49). The ventral tibial apophysis is relatively thin and crossed by the transversal groove across the tip, it articulates with the lateral projection of the cymbium. The dorsal edge of tibia rises dorsally to apophysis and forms a second apophysis resembling that in Aelurillus (figs. 18, 21) but is much broader (figs. 50, 51). Legs fawn with femora I-IV pale fawn. Tarsi I-II have scopulae. Length of segments of legs: I 0.67+0.64+0.90+0.82+1.35, II 0.63+0.60+0.73 + +0.79+1.29, III 0.82+1.05+0.84+0.75+1.50, IY -+1.32+1.29+0.99 + +1.89. Eatio d — 1.53.

http://rcin.org.pl 27 Notes ou systematics of Salticidae 253

REFERENCES

B o n n e t P. 1945-1961. Bibliographia araneorum. Analyse méthodique de toute la littéra­ ture aranéologique jusqu’en 1939. 1-3. Toulouse, T. 1: 832 pp., 28 tt; T. 2: 5058 pp.; T. 3.: 591 pp. Ch y z er C., K u l c z y ń sk i L. [W.] 1891-1897. Araneae Hungariae. Secundum collectiones a Leone B ec k er pro parte perscrutatas. Budapestini, T. 1:168 + 3 pp., 6 tt.; T. 2: 365 p., 10 tt. Dahl M. 1926. Spinnentiere oder Arachnoidea. I. Springspinnen ( Salticidae). Die Tierwelt Deutschlands, 3, 1. Jena, 56 pp., 159 ff. D e n is J., Mik u l s k a I. 1960. Une araignée utilisant les coquilles de Gastéropodes. Bull. Soc. ent. France., Paris, 65: 27-28, 2 ff. G aliano M. E. 1963. Las especies americanas de aranas de la familia Salticidae, descriptas por Eugène S im o n . Redescripciones basadas en los ejemplares tipicos. Physis, Buenos Aires, 23, 66:273-470, 42 tt. G alia n o M. E. 1964a. Salticidae (Araneae) Formicif ormes. I. Revision del género Martella P e c k h a m , 1892. Physis, Buenos Aires, 24, 68:353-363, 3 tt. G alia n o M. E. 1964b. “ Salticidae” (Araneae) Formiciformes. II. Revision dcl género “ Z u ­ niga'” P e c k iia m , 1892. Acta zool. ИИ., Tucuman, 20:67-79, 3 tt. G alia n o M. E. 1964c. Salticidae (Araneae) Formicif or mes. III. Revision del género Sim- prulla Sim o n , 1901. Physis, Buenos Aires, 24, 68:419-423, 1 t. G alia n o M. E. 1965. Salticidae (Araneae) Formicif ormes. IV. Revision del género “ Sarinda" P e c k h a m , 1892. Rev. Mus. argent. Cienc. nat., Buenos Aires, 1, 4:267-312, 8 tt. G alia n o M. E. 1966a. Salticidae (Araneae) Formicif or mes. V. Revision del género “Sy- nemosyna” H e n t z , 1846. Rev. Mus. argent. Cienc. nat., Buenos Aires, 1, 6:339-380, 63 ff. G a l ia n o M. E. 1966b. Salticidae (Araneae) Formicif ormes. VI. El genero Atomosphyrus S im o n , 1902. Physis, Buenos Aires, 26, 72:279-284, 20 ff. G a l ia n o M. E. 1967. Salticidae (Araneae) Formicif ormes. VIII. Nuevas descripciones. Physis, Buenos Aires, 27, 74:27-39, 32 ff. G a l ia n o M. E. 1969. Salticidae (Araneae) Formicif ormes. IX. Adicion a las revisiones de los generös Martella y Sarinda. Physis, Buenos Aires, 28, 77:247-255, 25 ff. Kocu L. 1875. Beschreibungen einiger von Herrn Dr. Zim m e r m a n n bei Niesky in der Ober- -Lausitz und im Riesengebirge entdeckter neuer Spinnenarten. Abh. naturf. Ges., Görlitz, 15:1-21, t. 1. K r a u s O. 1955. Spinnen von Korsika, Sardinien und Elba ( Arachn., Araneae). Senck. biol., Frankfurt a. M., 36:371-394, 39 ff. M ik u l s k a I. 1961a. O niezwykłym sposobie życia pająka Pellenes nigrociliatus (L. K o c h ) var. bilunulata S im o n zamieszkującego muszlę ślimaków. Prz. zool., Wrocław. 5:218-225, 12 ff. M ik u l s k a I. 1961b. Parental care in a rare spider Pellenes nigrociliatus (L. K o c h ) var. bilunulata S im o n . Nature, London, 190 (4773):365-366, 3 ff. P etrunkevitch A. 1928. Systema Aranearum. Trans. Conn. Acad. Arts Sei., New Haven, Conn., 29:1-270. P etrunkevitch A. 1939. Catalogue of American spiders. Trans. Conn. Acad. Arts Sei., New. Haven, Conn., 33:133-338. P r ó sz y ń sk i J. 1961. Pająki Góry Nartowej лѵ Puszczy Kampinoskiej. Fragin. faun., War­ szawa, 8:555-595, 2 ff., 3 tbl. P r ó sz y ń sk i J. 1968a. Redescriptions of type-species of genera of Salticidae (Araneida), IV-V. Ann. zool., Warszawa, 26:217-225, 12 ff. P r ó s z y ń s k i J. 1968b. Redescriptions of type-species of genera of Salticidae (Araneida), V I - V I I . Ann. zool., Warszawa, 26:239-247, 13 ff.

http://rcin.org.pl 254 J. Prószyński 28

P r ó s z y ń s k i J. 1968c. Systematic revision of the genus Yllenus Sim o n , 1868 (Araneida, Salticidae). Ann. zool., Warszawa, 26:409-494, 185 ff. P r ó s z y ń s k i J. (in print) Redescriptions of the A. E. G r u b e ’s East Siberian species of Sal­ ticidae (Araneida) in the collection of the Wroclaw Zoological Museum. Ann. zool., Warszawa. R o e w e r C. F. 1965. Die Lyssomanidae und Salticidae-Pluridentati der Aetiopischen Region (Araneae). Ann. Mus. Afr. centr., 8°, Sei. zool., Tervuren, 139, 86 pp., 73 ff. S im o n E. 1868. Monographie des espèces européennes de la famille des Attides. Ann. Soc. ent. France, Paris, 4, 8:11-72, 529-726, tt. 5-7. S im o n E. 1871. Revision des Attidae europeènnes. Supplément à la monographie des Attides. Ann. Soc. ent. France, Paris, 5, 1:125-230. Sim o n E. 1876. Les Arachnides de France, 3. Paris, 364 pp., tt. 9-13. S im o n E. 1901-19031. Histoire naturelle des Araignées, 2. Paris, pp. 381-1080, ff. 385-1121. Sim o n E . 1937. Les Arachnides de France. 6, 5. Paris, pp. 979-1298, ff. 1502-2028.

STRESZCZENIE [Tytuł: Notatki o systematyce Salticidae (Arachnida, Aranei). І-ѴІ]. Autor podkreśla konieczność rewizji podziału rodziny Salticidae na pod- rodziny i jako pierwszy krok w tym kierunku proponuje połączenie 4 podrodzin, obejmujących mrówkokształtne Salticidae w jedną, wspólną podrodzinę 8y- nemosyninae B a n k s , 1892. Autor synonimizuje następujące gatunki: Aelurillus gilvus (Sim o n , 1868) z Aelurillus festivus (C. L. Косы, 1834), Pellenes bilunulatus Sim o n , 1877 z Pellenes nigroeïliatus (L. Kocu, 1875), Philaeus bilineatus (W a l c k e n a e r , 1826) z Philaeus chrysops (P o d a , 1761) i Phlegra luteofasciata (Sim o n , 1871) z Phlegra fasciata (H a iin , 1826) oraz podaje redeskrypcje tych gatunków. Autor analizuje zmienność indywi­ dualną Aelurillus v-insignitus (Cl e r c k ,1758), który występuje w Polsce w dwóch formach: czarnej i szarej (interpretowanej przez K ulczyńskiego jako Ae. gilvus), zmienność Pellenes nigroeïliatus (L. K o c h , 1875) i Philaeus chrysops (P o d a , 1761). Autor redeskrybuje również typy opisanego z Polski zapomnia­ nego gatunku Ileliophanus varians Sim o n , 1868.

РЕЗЮМЕ [Заглавие: Заметки по систематике Salticidae (Arachnida, Aranei). I—VI]. Автор считает, что разделение семействаSalticidae на подсемейства требует ревизии и как первый шаг в этом направлении предлагает объединить муравье­ подобныхSalticidae в одно общее подсемействоSynemosyninae Banks , 1892.

1 There is quite a lot of confusion in quotation of that important book of S im o n , which appeared printed in 4 parts in years 1897-1903 and has been bound into a single volume with the front page date 1897. The foot note on page 1080 of the book gives information that the pages 381-668 appeared in 1901 and the pages 669-1080 in 1903. Following that I accept the above quotation as a proper way of quotation of the Salticidae part of the 2-nd volume of the Sim o n ’s book.

http://rcin.org.pl 29 Notes on systemati.es of Salticidae 255

Автор синонимизирует следующие виды:

Aelurillus gilvus (S im o n , 1868) с Aelurillus festivus (C. L. Коен, 1834), Pellenes bilunulatus Sim o n , 1877 с Pellenes nigrociliatus (L. K o c h , 1875), Philaeus bilineatus (W alck enaer , 1826) с Philaeus chrysops (P o d a , 1761) и Phlegra luteofasciata (S im o n , 1871) с Phlegra fasciata (H a h n , 1826) и приводит переописания этих видов. Автор анализирует индивидуальную измен­ чивость Aelurillus v-insignitus (C l er ck , 1758), который встречается в Польше в виде двух форм: черной и серой(Кульчинский считает ее Ае. gilvus), изменчивость Pelle­ nes nigrociliatus (L. Коен, 1875) и Philaeus chrysops (P o d a , 1761). Автор приводит также переописание типа забытого видаHeliophanus varians Sim o n , 1868, который был описан из Польши.

ШЛЯ № ' * > ■ loki aj Akademii • ■ i BiBLIOTFKsi

\

http://rcin.org.pl